From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161780AbXDXOii (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:38:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161783AbXDXOii (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:38:38 -0400 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.229]:62144 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161780AbXDXOih (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:38:37 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:from:organization:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=hBAAw5ldPFbI1eTPeBPh5iMJ0rgK6PeaA3tcq1MK1vU+LzAfhvMNMRMtySPqmbEe+jMCP20yBjzkk7WIFp6zFmf4Lj2wBx1tKrCEnU6t+LpHdtNPZ7ffcFW4BCGwfIu/YyMyqYaFDTuEeNnCNlzTP5O5ev0IvsvAz3lYBn6tA8c= From: Gene Heskett Organization: Organization? very little To: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [REPORT] cfs-v4 vs sd-0.44 Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:38:32 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: David Lang , Peter Williams , Arjan van de Ven , Linus Torvalds , Nick Piggin , Juliusz Chroboczek , Con Kolivas , ck list , Bill Davidsen , Willy Tarreau , William Lee Irwin III , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Mike Galbraith , Thomas Gleixner , caglar@pardus.org.tr References: <200704220959.34978.kernel@kolivas.org> <20070424072408.GA27769@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20070424072408.GA27769@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200704241038.32766.gene.heskett@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 24 April 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote: >* David Lang wrote: >> > (Btw., to protect against such mishaps in the future i have changed >> > the SysRq-N [SysRq-Nice] implementation in my tree to not only >> > change real-time tasks to SCHED_OTHER, but to also renice negative >> > nice levels back to 0 - this will show up in -v6. That way you'd >> > only have had to hit SysRq-N to get the system out of the wedge.) >> >> if you are trying to unwedge a system it may be a good idea to renice >> all tasks to 0, it could be that a task at +19 is holding a lock that >> something else is waiting for. > >Yeah, that's possible too, but +19 tasks are getting a small but >guaranteed share of the CPU so eventually it ought to release it. It's >still a possibility, but i think i'll wait for a specific incident to >happen first, and then react to that incident :-) > > Ingo In the instance I created, even the SysRq+b was ignored, and ISTR thats supposed to initiate a reboot is it not? So it was well and truly wedged. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) I use technology in order to hate it more properly. -- Nam June Paik